High Street Dental Care

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We found this practice was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations and had taken into consideration appropriate guidance.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

The judgement for Learning culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safe systems, pathways and transitions is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safeguarding is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Involving people to manage risks is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

Staff knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year. Staff we spoke with told us that equipment and instruments were well maintained and readily available. The provider described the processes they had in place to identify and manage risks. Staff felt confident that risks were well managed at the practice, and the reporting of risks was encouraged.

Emergency equipment and medicines were available, but not checked in accordance with national guidance. Staff could access these in a timely way. Records to confirm the availability and effective operation of emergency equipment and medicines were not kept. Following our assessment, the provider submitted evidence that action had been taken to address this issue. The premises were clean, well maintained and free from clutter. Hazardous substances were clearly labelled and stored safely. We saw satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions. Fire exits were clear and well signposted, and fire safety equipment was serviced and well maintained.

The practice ensured equipment was safe to use and maintained and serviced according to manufacturers’ instructions. The practice ensured the facilities were maintained in accordance with regulations. A fire safety risk assessment was carried out. We found that this was not completed in line with the legal requirements. Risks were not clearly identified or mitigated. Following our assessment, the provider submitted evidence that a new fire risk assessment had been commissioned. The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment and the required radiation protection information was available. The practice had risk assessments to minimise the risk that could be caused from substances that are hazardous to health. The practice systems to assess, monitor and manage risks to patient and staff safety were not always detailed or effective. We found scope for improvement in the identification and mitigation of risks associated with health and safety, sharps safety, sepsis awareness and lone working. Following our assessment the provider submitted updated risk assessments which aligned with recommended guidance. The practice systems for appropriate and safe handling, storage and dispensing of medicines, did not always follow recognised guidance. Medicines were not always dispensed in approved packaging and information was not always given regarding duration of treatment. Antimicrobial prescribing audits were not carried out in line with guidance. Following our assessment the provider submitted evidence outlining how action would be taken to ensure this issue was addressed.

People commented positively regarding staffing at the service.

Staff we spoke with had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They told us that there were sufficient staffing levels. Staff stated they felt respected, supported and valued. They were proud to work in the practice. Staff discussed their training needs during annual appraisals, clinical supervision, practice team meetings and ongoing informal discussions. They also discussed learning needs, general wellbeing and aims for future professional development. Staff we spoke with demonstrated knowledge of safeguarding and were aware of how safeguarding information could be accessed. Staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children.

The practice had a recruitment policy and procedure to help them employ suitable staff, including for agency or locum staff. We found that although this reflected the relevant legislation, it was not followed and applied consistently. Required pre employment information was not available for all staff, including Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks, references and proof of ID. Following our assessment the provider submitted evidence that some missing information had been obtained and recruitment practices would be updated. The practice ensured clinical staff were qualified, registered with the General Dental Council and had appropriate professional indemnity cover. Newly appointed staff had a structured induction, and clinical staff completed continuing professional development required for their registration with the General Dental Council. The practice had arrangements to ensure staff training was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals. We saw the practice had effective processes to support and develop staff with additional roles and responsibilities.

People commented positively regarding cleanliness at the service.

The practice appeared clean and there was an effective schedule in place to ensure it was kept clean. Staff followed infection control principles, including the use of personal protective equipment (PPE). Hazardous waste was segregated and disposed of safely. We observed the decontamination of used dental instruments, which aligned with national guidance.

The practice had infection control procedures which reflected published guidance and the equipment in use was maintained and serviced. Staff demonstrated knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes and we saw single use items were not reprocessed. Staff had appropriate training, and the practice completed infection prevention and control (IPC) audits in line with current guidance. The practice had procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems. We found this was not always carried out in line with a risk assessment. Where monitoring checks had identified water temperature was outside the recommended range to control the development of legionella bacteria, action was not always recorded as being taken. The practice had policies and procedures in place to ensure clinical waste was segregated and stored appropriately in line with guidance. We identified scope for improvement in ensuring clinical waste bags were marked in a way to identify the practice as their source.

The judgement for Medicines optimisation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.